Geoengineering and the Age of Aquarius

And just like a contrail you don't see them - all you see is the water - same with the contrail - all you see is the water.

And a fake tree (doubling as a cell tower) is the same as a real tree because they are, 'essentially trees'. The fact that one of them is made out
of some industrial grade plastic or petroleum product is irrelevant. The fact that one of them is an environmental scourge - irrelevant. The fact
that one of them is outgassing noxious fumes is irrelevant.

Am I starting to get the hang of your argument? Let me know.

Have a look at these pictures of fake trees nestled against real trees - all you see are the trees because, even though plastic, they are
'essentially trees' and that's all you see. Tallyho.

Thankyou for your contribution and welcome to ATS. I watched this video yesterday when Pilot put it up and it is very very confronting. I think, and
I could be completely wrong, that one of the reasons there is so little discussion on the topics of transhumanism and nano and smart nano is because
the systems, like HAARP, are so cutting edge and new and so filled with marketing propoganda to gain acceptance that there is no real understanding of
what they are.

The entire concept of, for instance, the warfighter/the ultimate soldier, is no concept anymore. It is happening and being created. The Borg of
yesterday is a caricature and bears little resemblance to the sophistication and invisibility of a nano augmented body and mind.

That we, ourselves, have been involved as captive guinea pigs is clear from Morgellons.

Going to put up a few definitions to try and increase the comfort level:

Transhumanism is an emergent school of speculative philosophy analysing or favouring the use of technology, especially neurotechnology,
biotechnology, and nanotechnology, to improve the human condition.

Transhumanists generally support emerging technologies, including many that are controversial, such as human genetic engineering, cryonics, and
advanced uses of computers and communications; as well as future technologies such as space travel, cloning, nanotechnology, and mind
uploading.

Morgellons Disease is a label assigned by the founder of the MRF to the condition of an ill child in 2002 with numerous symptoms outside known
illness categories. One physical sign became the “defining” characteristic of the illness: small diameter “filaments” protruding from lesions
near the child's mouth and other body areas that were both sensitive and painful.

And just like a contrail you don't see them - all you see is the water - same with the contrail - all you see is the water.

And a fake tree (doubling as a cell tower) is the same as a real tree because they are, 'essentially trees'. The fact that one of them is made out of
some industrial grade plastic or petroleum product is irrelevant.

not even close to being a good analogy - cluds and contrails are both water - they are hte same material - one is not water and the other "fake water"
made out of something else.

The fact that one of them is an environmental scourge - irrelevant. The fact that one of them is outgassing noxious fumes is
irrelevant.

Irrelevant to whether they are both made up of weater crystals - correct.

Am I starting to get the hang of your argument? Let me know.

not even close - you need more truth and accuracy, and drop the stupid strawman arguments.

Unexplained medical conditions can cause serious illness and disability among individuals, as well as demands on health care resources. In January
2008, CDC began an investigation that sought to better understand an unexplained apparent dermopathy, commonly referred to as Morgellons. CDC
partnered with Kaiser Permanente (KP) - Northern California, a large group health plan in an area where many possible cases had been reported, and the
Armed Forces Institute of Pathology, to begin a comprehensive clinical and laboratory study of this condition

This comprehensive study of an unexplained apparent dermopathy demonstrated no infectious cause and no evidence of an environmental link. There
was no indication that it would be helpful to perform additional testing for infectious diseases as a potential cause. Future efforts should focus on
helping patients reduce their symptoms through careful attention to treatment of co-existing medical, including psychiatric conditions, that might be
contributing to their symptoms.

There are a number of interesting revelations within this study not the least of which seems to contradict statements by the CDC. Originally,
according to the Morgellons site (which is an interesting read in itself) here:

the disease was found in a child in 2002. The study by the CDC and Kaiser required persons to be at least 13 years old. The reason for this criteria
becomes clear when we read the battery of psychological testing these persons were put through. A child can't do these tests.

Participants were administered a battery of standardized neuropsychological tests. The Wechsler Test of Adult Reading (WTAR) was used to provide
an estimate of intellectual functioning. Cognitive function was assessed using the: Stroop Color and Word Test; the Proverbs and Verbal Fluency
measures of the Delis-Kaplan Executive Function System™ (D-KEFS™); Ruff 2 & 7 Selective Attention Test; Brief Visuospatial Memory Test-Revised
(BVMT-R™); Hopkins Verbal Learning Test-Revised™; and the Trail Making Test (TMT) Parts A & B. The PAI® (Personality Assessment Inventory™) was
used to assess personality functioning and to screen for evidence of major psychiatric disorders [5]. All tests were administered in-person, scored
and interpreted by trained neuropsychologists.

Also, it seems strange, but you tell me, that a clinical search for the cause of a disease would include, off the bat, all of these psychological
tests. Shouldn't that come later - after no infectious agent is found and those avenues have been exhausted? Again, you tell me. Seems more like
an NSA OP, paving the way for 'nothing to see here'...'these people are all loonies.'

How could a child get this if it's so in the mind?

Continuing - isn't Kaiser an insurance agency? The people in the test group were already coming to Kaiser without relief. That doesn't sound very
impartial to me. Also of interest are these statements from the study:

Over 75% of our cases reported onset of their symptoms during or after 2002, but the epidemiologic importance of this is unclear as it also
corresponds to the time when Internet postings related to this condition began to surface.

The most common histopathologic abnormality was solar elastosis, a degeneration of dermal connective tissue and increased amounts of elastic
tissue due to prolonged sun exposure. However, this finding might be expected among a population residing in California and does not necessarily
suggest a causal relationship.

As far as the conclusions go:

We were not able to conclude based on this study whether this unexplained dermopathy represents a new condition, as has been proposed by those who
use the term Morgellons, or wider recognition of an existing condition such as delusional infestation, with which it shares a number of clinical and
epidemiologic features.

Read Dr Wymore's position statement, it could be an exercise in gate keeping, or not. He seems sincere and has no patience with debunkers:

/
Amateur debunkers carry no weight in academia and have no relevance in the
discussion of Morgellons Disease in the scientific and medical community. Since
the clinicians (both D.O. and M.D.) and scientists at the conference I mentioned
above did not debunk a formal presentation on the topic of Morgellons Disease,
why would an amateur think that they could? An amateurish debunking
approach is often nothing more than a type argumentative arrogance. A person,
or persons, manages to attract an audience that will participate in the argument
and it gives the debunker a sense of power. What goes on at debunking sites is
most definitely NOT scientific debate and critical inquiry. Critical scientific debate
occurs at conferences (regional, national or international), during seminars and
during the editorial review when scientific manuscripts are submitter. If an
amateur debunker (unless the debunker is paid for the debunking services, in
which case she/he would be a professional debunker) feels that they can
compete in the professional scientific arena, let them submit an abstract to a
conference or a manuscript to a scientific journal (a legitimate, peer-reviewed
scientific journal)

Of course he has no time for debunking - science does not rely upon amateur debunking but on evidence.

however I have my doubts whether this study is real science or not, since it does not actualy appoach morgellons with a testable hypothesis, but
rather with a nubmer of pre-conceptions that immediatly show a particular viewpoint:

1. Delusions of parasites (DOP) is a diagnosable condition.
2. Neurotic excoriations can be found in the general population.
3. Crystal-meth users as well as some other addictive substances can cause
DOP or DOP-like symptoms and severe skin problems.
4. The condition known as Morgellons Disease, or Morgellons Syndrome (the
CDC preference for labeling this condition), is none-of-the-above. Researchers
and clinical faculty at the Oklahoma State University Center for Health Sciences
have been looking into Morgellons Disease for several years now. We do not
know a) the cause of Morgellons, b) what the fibers, black specks, granules or
other unusual "shed" material are made of, or c) any conclusively effective
treatment. We do know that some samples of fibers associated with Morgellons
Disease are not simple textiles of animal, plant or synthetic nature

A couple of things, to me, are curious about Morgellons and the way that Morgellons has been so far dealt with and not. There seems to be a start
date - 2002. The start date involved a child with what has become the signature symptom for Morgellons.

One physical sign became the “defining” characteristic of the illness: small diameter “filaments” protruding from lesions near the
child's mouth and other body areas that were both sensitive and painful.

There's another start date slightly earlier in 2001. That start date was for federal funding of nanotechnology. Only now, after 10 years of
essentially unchecked development wherein nano size materials have been treated basically the same as bulk materials of the same substance even though
they are in no way related, are protocols for safety being considered. View the budget for the National Nanotechnology Initiative here:

A number of studies have shown the dangers of nano size particles to human health. Actually there were a number of studies pre-nanotechnology
explosion days that showed the same thing i.e. studies on asbestos and depleted Uranium bombs and the effects of these nano size particles on human
health.

In the first known case that appears to link nanoparticles to health problems in humans, seven women fell ill after working with paint containing
the particles at a factory in China, and two later died, according to an article in the European Respiratory Journal.

The women developed itchy eruptions on their arms and faces, along with breathing problems, after working without proper protection at a factory
producing paint that contains nanoparticles, which can be as tiny as one-billionth of a meter, or one nanometer.

The women were all found to have ball-like collections of immune cells in the lining of the lung that form when the immune system is unable to
remove a foreign body.

“It is clear that the symptoms, the examination results and the progress of the disease in our patients differ markedly from respiratory
pathologies induced by paint inhalation”

Despite the uncertainty about nano-risks, nanotechnology is increasingly being used in the manufacture of commercial products like sunscreen,
cosmetics, food packaging, clothing, disinfectants, household appliances, surface coatings, paints and outdoor furniture varnishes.

In the decades before the mesothelioma defining moment with asbestos, the ill effects of asbestos were pooh poohed in similar fashion to the current
' they're loonies' label thrown around for Morgellons sufferers. Wouldn't it be ironic, as Sofia Smallstorm says in the video, to find out that
we are all infected and are just time bombs because the disease has not manifested as protruding filaments in us yet?

Originally posted by luxordelphi
A couple of things, to me, are curious about Morgellons and the way that Morgellons has been so far dealt with and not. There seems to be a start
date - 2002. The start date involved a child with what has become the signature symptom for Morgellons.

That's simply when Mary Leitao founded the Morgellons Research Foundation, which helped popularize the diagnosis. Previously on the internet these
patients congregated at NUSPA (the National Unidentified Skin Parasite Association) in the late 1990s. But of course identical symptoms have always
been reported. For example in 1947, in 'Skin Manifestations of Internal Disorders', Kurt Weiner describes Delusional Parasitosis patients
who:

persistently bring little follicular plugs, scales, or woolen fibers wrapped in paper or kept in a box to convince the doctor they have worms or
insects in their skin

Why have you put up a link to a debunking site, a site that teaches how to debunk Morgellons? The site styles itself as "skeptical analysis and
discussion" and yet there is no analysis, only debunking. I can appreciate on some remote ivory tower level, a governments' need to protect the
nano-technology industry at all costs from potential lawsuits from a global population as a potential class in action. Still...the study of
Morgellons was a grassroots endeavor that seems to have garnered some heavy hitters to its' side. I've read it described as pandemic on a number of
websites and it seems to have hit in all 48 contiguous states as this old map attests here:

Mary Leitao seems to have been the person who coined the term Morgellons for the condition of her child in 2002 and initiated public awareness which
subsequently led to the need for a site like the one you put up so that in the end, your site, owes its' very existence and subsistence to Mary
Leitao without whom, debunking would not have been necessary.

The Morgellons Research Foundation is no longer active, however, the information available on that site has not been in any way negated. Funds left
from the MRF were donated to the Oklahoma State University Foundation, the link that Pilot put up here:

and this would be the same link where an actual PHD, rather than a site teaching how to debunk Morgellons, talks about why evidence that he has
gathered is not leading to a delusions of parasites diagnosis. This would be similar to the lab study I earlier put forward which stated that a
conclusion of a diagnosis of delusion was not possible.

If you would like to read about current, 2012, events in the ongoing search for a cause and cure for Morgellons, look here:

Originally posted by luxordelphi
Why have you put up a link to a debunking site, a site that teaches how to debunk Morgellons?

Because you were discussing the timeline. You suggested it was somehow coincident with some nano-technology project. I showed that it was not.

What's the difference between debunking and analysis? Surely in order to debunk something you need to analyse it. Is a well-researched timeline not
analysis? Was there something actually incorrect there?

Many conditions share the exact same set of symptoms as "Morgellons", menopause for example, or diabetes, or substance abuse.

Because you were discussing the timeline. You suggested it was somehow coincident with some nano-technology project. I showed that it was not.

And it's on to deja vu for me and you. You have shown nothing yet for my money/time. The debunking link you put up has on its' site a timeline.
Excuse me if I don't waste too much effort with it. You never were able to convince me that WWII skies filled with smoke meant persistent contrails
have always been around and I just never noticed. There were no sky grids on my family picnics or days at the beach.

Same way I don't recall Morgellons. I've never heard of alchoholics or menopausal women with fibers emerging from their skin. Sorry - no sale.

Still...your reply is very topical in that we all get to watch the new mind-control in action and the many varied tools demonstrated via social
networking. Live and learn. If we live, we will learn.

You never were able to convince me that WWII skies filled with smoke meant persistent contrails have always been around and I just never
noticed. There were no sky grids on my family picnics or days at the beach.

Clearly though, that's what happened. Either that, or the people who DO remember persistent contrails were just imagining them.

Now what's more likely, you not remembering something, or millions of people making up the exact same thing.

Not to mention all the science books, newspapers, and the old photos, videos, and movies. And, of course, the accounts of numerous WWII pilots.

Does all that really pale into nothing compared to your memories of childhood picnics?

Originally posted by Gmoneycricket
So people during war time, seen contrails,
millions died, feared for their lives.
We are expected to believe, that current contrails,
are harmless.

The Contrails of War,
may not be the best thing to convince us,
they are harmless.

Contrails were also seen before the war (back during the 1920s even), and after the war (in increasing numbers after the advent of commercial jet
travel). And the contrails during the war were not in themselves harmful. They were just contrails. Clouds of ice crystals.

Thank you for your thoughtful reply, Luxor.
I am NOT arguing system versus system. That applies to interpretation and supplementary techniques.

There is a common root of all systems using planets and 12 signs.

Surely you agree that as we all live on the same planet, there is but one precession for all of us, East or West.

Most Western astrologers use a calculation which cannot by logic have any precession at all. Tropical astrology. See my quoted thread. It is simply
excluded there by logical definition, not by any system of interpretation - as if you argued against the Fourth God in Islam whereas it has been
defined that they only believe in One God.

So presumably you do have TWO WHEELS for precession, one preceding against the other one?

Then I have questions - genuinely curious, no trolling,

1. Do you believe precession is caused by a "wobble" in the Earth's axis?
2. Why is it then some astronomers (like Walter Crittenden I quote in my thread) cite observations that the same amount of precession is shown by the
planets Jupiter and Saturn in the sky looked at from the Earth? 3. Doesn't that suggest that somehow the entire Solar System is in precession?

If not, I would like to hear and see some facts and arguments. I am open.

The next point in logic: the Western astrologers that do not use the tropical system (they use sidereal astrology), posit a twelve-sign division much
like the Indians. Almost at the same places, sometimes there is a degree or two of difference.

However, using their calculations, we would still be in Pisces now.
I am most interested in any small discrepancies, as I am not a "true believer" in traditions transmitted by Indians any more than by those in
Egypt.

The Indians most likely took the 12 signs from the West at the time of Alexander the Great anyway. Think Yavanacharya - Yavana means Greek in
Sanskrit.

I think our world will sooner or later arrive at one system of calculation - hopefully latest by the true Age of Aquarius. Meeting points of the East
and West are necessary prerequisites, like the European Renaissance.

If you know anything of the Hindu myths surrounding astrology, you would be stricken by the similarity to Greek myths and thoughts. Almost 90%
identical stories for planetary gods - and roughly the same era of history. Like, Hermes sold Apollon's sheep from the crib - which flock he did not
own, and Budha, the planet Mercury (with one d only) was such a sweet infant that he made his pseudo-father Jupiter lie about him by his mere
appearance (his true father was the Moon god, a sickly male god in India's pantheon). They are both tied to the planet Mercury which signifies
rationality as well as lying and deception and jokes and puns and theft. In both astro-mythologies.

OK. I think geoengineering feats right now could be partially explained by Uranus in sidereal Pisces squaring Pluto in sidereal Sagittarius added by
Virgo Saturn presently but that will change on August 4..

Your posts are so interesting and so knowledgeable that I'm going to have a hard time giving back in kind. The only really good explanation of why
use a tropical system that I ever read was so long ago that I no longer remember book nor author nor exact wording. The basics of it were that there
is an evolutionary spiritual process that is experienced individually with a start date of the spring equinox in Aries. It presumes either successive
lives or non-linear time. It presumes that the equinoctial point is only significant for an individual birth at certain apocalyptic moments i.e. the
horsemen of the apocalypse i.e. the disasters that periodically happen on earth which alter in some significant way the heavenly order. This would
also be a good way to tell if that age is upon us because we would see the heavenly order altered. Looking at some of the mega-monuments around the
world and their seeming astronomical significance, it could seem that many cultures in many different times were concerned with tracking the heavenly
order to make sure that it had not deviated based on equinoctial or solstice or planetary or moon or star points and orbits.

As far as precession - to the best of my knowledge I believe it is caused by the orbit of our solar system with another system(s) and that we are a
binary or trinary. In my very early days at ATS someone gave me a link to a research facility called the Binary Research Institute and I was
immediately smitten. But you know this because you mention Walter Cruttenden. So no argument with you here.

As far as small discrepancies go I can only give you my own experience with the information as it came to me. I have been an astronomy fan far longer
than I have known astrology so it was an eclipse that didn't happen and Mars too low on the horizon and the Moon incorrectly positioned in
relationship to the horizon that set me off. Around that same time there was a big deal in the news about Ophiuchus being added to the zodiac. There
was also a big deal in the news about zodiacal light and how we were going to be seeing this but not to be alarmed because Kahlil Gibran had poetized
about it long ago and so it was something normal. In other words things were in flux and when things are in flux it's best to hold fast to the
center so that's what I did.

NASA said in 2002 or so that we were transitioning to Aquairius. To me, they were the keepers of the equinoctial points. I'm not discounting
anything that you have said about demarcation lines and I fully appreciate the significance of those. I am saying that in flux, demarcation points
become nebulous and in flux it is best to appreciate the last piece of solid ground. Comparing this time to the dark of the moon we might even say
that there is nothing and yet all things are possible. Also, I don't know if retrograde applies to precession but if it does, we may both be right.

Originally posted by Gmoneycricket
So people during war time, seen contrails,
millions died, feared for their lives.
We are expected to believe, that current contrails,
are harmless.

The Contrails of War,
may not be the best thing to convince us,
they are harmless.

Contrails were also seen before the war (back during the 1920s even), and after the war (in increasing numbers after the advent of commercial jet
travel). And the contrails during the war were not in themselves harmful. They were just contrails. Clouds of ice crystals.

I find all forms of engine exhaust harmful, no matter the year they were created.
And Ice crystals with fuel byproducts mixed in does not sound harmless.
So do you have links to back up that statement?

And if the pilots left contrails, they could be seen and possibly shot down with anti-aircraft guns.
Can you prove that no plane has ever been shot down because someone saw its harmless contrail.
So do you have links to back up that statement?

I want to see all the proof you have that contrails are harmless during war.

The Above Top Secret Web site is a wholly owned social content community of The Above Network, LLC.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.